Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus vs Recorded Future comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.5
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Recorded Future
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Digital Risk Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is 1.3%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Recorded Future is 18.0%, down from 18.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

RichPhillips - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers a centralized dashboard for reporting threats and anomalies
The tool along with other suite of products provides us with threat and alert information.  The solution has provided us with a centralized dashboard for reporting threats and anomalies.  I am impressed with the tool's integration of Palo Alto products which serves as a platform for security.  I…
Dr. Merrick Watchorn - PeerSpot reviewer
Traceless online searches, stable, and scalable
There is a semantic oncology dynamic relationship between how the MIGR Tech framework needs more data infusion enrichment capabilities. To be clear, what the vendor is doing is of a high standard, and my only critique is that they need to make new enhancements. I am aware that the vendor is making a concerted effort to add additional information to their repository, and it is something they actively do. The vendor has publicly stated that they will work on this, and I always pay attention to make sure they adhere to that. This does not change over time. The export feature of the recording needs to stop being so restricted. When they record in order to save themselves by operations, I would expect that as a super user, if I asked to download the dataset I'm looking for, I would not be limited in my data downloads. One of the cool things is, let's say we do our entire research and we want to save all of the materials that were returned, and that special custom search that we made, we can export that into a CSV file. The problem is it gets restricted. So sometimes when I say it's restricted, we don't get all the data that we saw online. So then we have to go and manually search for the specific thing we're looking for. I would like to have the URI and whatever value set that I search off, and for the NLP package to not be stripped out. It's like saying I want to do a Pcap analysis. Don't strip out the Pcap when I asked to see Pcap. That's what they're doing. They do this for many different reasons. One of them is, imagine if everyone downloaded datasets that are very large and it brings the whole system down.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The feature that I like best is the dashboard."
"It integrates well with other solutions and provides good threat intelligence in terms of external threats."
"I am impressed with the tool's integration of Palo Alto products which serves as a platform for security."
"The logs play a crucial role as they contribute to blocking unwanted Internet traffic."
"The most valuable feature is alerting."
"It can collect data from various sources, including social media and the dark web."
"As a threat intelligence tool, it's very helpful."
"The most valuable feature is Recorded Future's protection of exposed customer data on the hardware side."
"The intel that they were providing us over the emails was very good. If it found any hashtag in our organization's name on the dark web, a rogue IP, or a marketplace, it would send us an email and notify us that this is being mentioned, and if we want, they can take some action."
"The tool can integrate with a lot of security control and proactive protection devices."
"The most valuable features of Recorded Future are the useful alerts it provides. If we are monitoring a domain, the solution will provide us with an alert in a prompt manner. It is simple for clients to receive alerts. The advanced search is useful for more accurate filter results."
"From the feedback I've received from my clients, the most valuable feature is the ability to personalize the solution. The ability to have a customized dashboard makes it easy for leadership and management to obtain details. Intelligence analysts or security engineers care about the actions and results, whereas the leadership care about graphs and reports. Recorded Future helps my clients create reports and also determine how the intelligence that is generated is consumed. They can easily show the benefits to the leadership without them having to invest 10 hours a week into transferring numbers into a graph or into creating reports."
"The most valuable feature of Recorded Future is how it detects everything regarding our domain."
 

Cons

"I would like to have more technical documentation that contains greater detail on the types of threats that are occurring."
"I would like the tool to see more integration with Cortex XDR. There is no real reason to keep them separate."
"It is a completely cloud-based product at present."
"It would be helpful to have better documentation for configuring and installing the solution."
"It would be better if they used the threat intelligence feeds directly from their side and changing the verdict instead of us requesting it."
"While I don't think the tool is weak, its position isn't as dominant as it once was. Other companies like CrowdStrike and Mandiant are now challenging them in many areas. One downside is that Recorded Future can be complex for customers to use and understand. This isn't easy for clients to navigate."
"Lacks sufficient visibility of malware and international APT attacks."
"When you add one website to Recorded Future, it should automatically call all other websites and social media platforms."
"The customer support is frustrating and not efficient. They always request logs and screenshots that seem irrelevant."
"Recorded Future is a very expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved."
"The product gives many false positives. If someone talks about the brand or organization name in the public domain over chats or blocks, it gets highlighted. It may not necessarily be a threat but still gets highlighted which increases the false positive count."
"There is a semantic oncology dynamic relationship between how the MIGR Tech framework needs more data infusion enrichment capabilities."
"The solution would benefit from introducing automation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is reasonably priced."
"It is expensive."
"There appear to be up to five different levels, with the most expensive version costing around $95,000 to $105,000 a year for subscription services."
"I would rate the solution’s pricing a seven out of ten."
"The price of the solution is worth it. The overall performance of the solution outweighs the cost."
"The biggest disadvantage of Recorded Future is the cost here in Eastern Europe. The solution is correctly priced for big companies who have the money to invest in such solutions. Also, the solution is useless on its own, which means that you have to invest in other solutions with which Recorded Future can be integrated. At present, Recorded Future can cost 60,000 euros per year. I am able to offer my clients a 5% to 10% discount, but in this region, the cost is still prohibitive even with the discount. If Recorded Future were more flexible in terms of price, there would be better sales opportunities in Europe and Eastern Europe, in particular, because we have more small- and medium-sized companies here."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Insurance Company
8%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
I am impressed with the tool's integration of Palo Alto products which serves as a platform for security.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
I would like the tool to see more integration with Cortex XDR. There is no real reason to keep them separate.
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
The tool along with other suite of products provides us with threat and alert information.
What do you like most about Recorded Future?
The most valuable feature of Recorded Future is how it detects everything regarding our domain.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Recorded Future?
I am not the person responsible for purchases, but it's known that Recorded Future is expensive, with a personal rating of eight for cost.
What needs improvement with Recorded Future?
Their research capabilities and the human aspect should be more effective. The Insikt Group covers a narrow range of areas, which doesn't reflect my needs. Their research should be wider and more i...
 

Also Known As

Palo Alto Threat Intelligence Management
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Telkom Indonesia
Fujitsu, Regions, SITA, St. Jude Medical, Accenture, T-Mobile, TIAA, Intel Security, Armor, Alert Logic, NTT, Splunk
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus vs. Recorded Future and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.